XplanaZine

Without a procedure for systematically analyzing or assessing one’s online programs, courses and administrative support, an institution is likely to encounter fairly intractable problems associated with growth and/or technological change. The series of diagnostics instruments developed here differ from typical instruments because the questions tie not only to best practices in one area, but incorporate vision, values and project management philosophy with tactics and strategy.

The instruments have been designed to provide the following benefits to institutional and individual users:

a) provides almost instantaneous results by being easy to use;
b) does not require an initial cost or investment;
c) can be applied to users across the organization;
d) improves coordination between an institution’s units;
e) assures online program/course tie - in to the organization’s mission and vision;
f) pinpoints areas that need immediate attention;
g) facilitates a gap analysis by prioritizing needs and allowing one to suggest low - cost
remedies;
h) identifies programmatic strengths in order to build on them.

The first diagnostic survey instrument that has been developed in this series focuses on learning effectiveness. This is an integrative approach that requires close coordination between all stakeholders and participants, whether they are located in (or between) academic and administrative functions.

Ease of Use: Because the questionnaire is easy to use and administer, it is likely to be adopted across the institution. It is important that decision-makers and key implementation personnel in each unit participate. All stakeholders in the organization should be given the opportunity to critically analyze learning effectiveness from their point of view. Divergent opinions and visions will allow the organization to gain insight into the actual state of affairs.

Low-Cost: The questionnaire costs very little to implement and does not require an extensive investment of time or training. By being easy to implement at a very low cost, the organization begins to evaluate its program and approach in an integrative, across-the-institution manner. Ordinarily, this would be complicated and could involve expensive or conflict-engendering approaches. The diagnostic tool avoids this potential pitfall.

Improved Coordination: By involving stakeholders on every level of the organization, from implementation to administration, effective communication is established particularly as individuals discuss the questions and review the results. Task forces can be established, and effective planning can be built on a foundation of concepts that are commonly understood by all.

Mission and Vision Tie-In: The questions in the diagnostic survey instrument are designed to raise one’s awareness of how the online program and courses connect to the institution’s vision and overall mission statement. The importance of this cannot be overstated: whether or not an institution achieves its objectives depends precisely on how it implements the mission and vision within each aspect of its online program. Learning effectiveness can be measured by means of outcomes assessments and development appropriate metrics. However, if the mission and vision are not somehow applied to the learning outcomes, then the overall effectiveness cannot be determined in any meaningful manner. While discussing results of the survey on learning effectiveness, the units are able to communicate with each other how they achieve the tie-ins to the institution’s vision and mission.

Pinpointed Attention Areas: Perhaps one of the most important results from the survey instrument is the fact that it allows the institution to pinpoint problem areas with a fairly high degree of precision. It also gives individuals in different units the opportunity to discuss remedies and to explore the reasons for potential issues. This is a triage approach, which is innately valuable because it allows units to be aware of where the problems are and to determine the severity of the problem, while at the same time encouraging a dialogue about the nature, origin and impact of the problems.

Gap Analysis: A successful implementation of the diagnostic survey instrument, followed by discussion and analysis of the questions, the results and the proposed remedies facilitates a gap analysis. Briefly put, a gap analysis is a detailed look at the status of one’s program (as determined by the diagnostic tool) as compared with the ideal status. Where does the organization want to be? Where is it at this point? The difference is the gap. Where are the small gaps? How is the gap closed? By prioritizing needs and allowing one to suggest low-cost remedies, the institutional units can close the gaps. The initial diagnostic survey instrument helps set the institutional units on the right path to real results.

Identified Strengths as a Foundation: One benefit of this diagnostic approach is its identification of strengths as well as weaknesses. The areas of the program that are most operationally effective are revealed. Exactly where the institution is most clearly achieving its strategic goals becomes very clear. In developing action steps, particularly in conjunction with a gap analysis, the organization can follow the model established by the successful units or areas that are achieving maximum learning effectiveness. Building on success and strengths will allow the organization to present a unified front, and to coordinate development across academics, administrative support and information technology. It also allows the organization to develop effective training and support for learners, facilitators and subject matter experts.